Great profile on Edie Windsor and the DOMA case in the NYT: “It’s thrilling for me to be in this position,” she said at the eighth-floor apartment on Fifth Avenue just north of Washington Square that she and Ms. Spyer shared for three decades. “It’s almost a deliriously joyous thing for an old lady.”

Bill de Blasio's wife Chirlane McCray reflects on her lesbian past: “When I think about how young I was, what the world was like in 1979, I’m proud at what I was able to do. I was able to project my voice and claim my space in the world,” McCray said. “I hope young people struggling with their identity try to take heart from that. That was 33 years ago. The world has progressed a great deal.”

How would John Roberts rule on gay marriage cases? Richard Socarides: "If he rules against gay rights now, how is Roberts going to feel about the overturning of this precedent later—or having it overturned while he is still on the Court as Chief? That’s not to say public opinion is the only factor here. But the Supreme Court has previously held that marriage is a fundamental right, and sexual orientation, especially when viewed from today’s perspective, meets all the requirements for heightened constitutional scrutiny." Flashback: Roberts donated help to Romer v. Evans...

Wingnut Matt Barber claims half of gay men were sexually assaulted by pedophiles as children. "When not fighting the 'war on Christmas,' Mat Staver and Matt Barber continue to fight the California law that bans the use of sexual orientation conversion therapy on minors, which they have now taken to calling 'Jerry Sandusky laws' on the grounds that children who are sexually abused will now become gay because they will not be allowed to get therapy to help them deal with the abuse. "

At 3:15 pm ET, Ricky Martin will join UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, South African singer Yvonne Chaka Chaka and other LGBT and human rights leaders at a Human Rights Day panel called "Leadership in the Fight Against Homophobia" organized by the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, Human Rights Watch, and UN member states.

A group of scientists from the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis say they believe they have the answer to why people are gay, and believe it is an "epigenetic" one linking fathers to lesbian daughters and mothers to gay sons. And they say they can prove whether their theory is right within six months, US News reports:

Long thought to have some sort of hereditary link, a group of scientists suggested Tuesday that homosexuality is linked to epi-marks — extra layers of information that control how certain genes are expressed. These epi-marks are usually, but not always, "erased" between generations. In homosexuals, these epi-marks aren't erased — they're passed from father-to-daughter or mother-to-son, explains William Rice, an evolutionary biologist at the University of California Santa Barbara and lead author of the study.

More:

Rice and his team created a mathematical model that explains why homosexuality is passed through epi-marks, not genetics. Evolutionarily speaking, if homosexuality was solely a genetic trait, scientists would expect the trait to eventually disappear because homosexuals wouldn't be expected to reproduce. But because these epi-marks provide an evolutionary advantage for the parents of homosexuals: They protect fathers of homosexuals from underexposure to testosterone and mothers of homosexuals from overexposure to testosterone while they are in gestation.

"These epi-marks protect fathers and mothers from excess or underexposure to testosterone — when they carry over to opposite-sex offspring, it can cause the masculinization of females or the feminization of males," Rice says, which can lead to a child becoming gay. Rice notes that these markers are "highly variable" and that only strong epi-marks will result in a homosexual offspring.

Adds Rice: "We've found a story that looks really good. There's more verification needed, but we point out how we can easily do epigenetic profiles genome-wide. We predict where the epi-marks occur, we just need other studies to look at it empirically. This can be tested and proven within six months. It's easy to test. If it's a bad idea, we can throw it away in short order."

Legalizing gay marriage has long been a goal of the Broad Front, which has ample majorities in both houses of Congress. After the lower house votes, the project would go to the Senate. President Jose Mujica hopes to sign it into law early next year.

The "Marriage Equality Law" also would replace Uruguay's 1912 divorce law, which gave only women, and not their husbands, the right to renounce marriage vows without cause. In the early 20th Century, Uruguay's lawmakers saw this as an equalizer, since men at the time held all the economic and social power in a marriage, historian Gerardo Caetano said.

"A hundred years later, with all the changes that have occurred in Uruguayan society, this argument has fallen of its own accord," Caetano said Tuesday. "It's absolutely logical now that divorces can happen if either party wants it. And I really think it won't have much of an impact."

The AP adds that "The bill also would clarify rules for adoption and in-vitro fertilization, and eliminate the words 'marido y mujer' (husband and woman) in marriage contracts, referring instead to the gender neutral 'contrayentes' (contracting parties)" and the law "would let couples, gay or straight, decide whose surname goes first when they name their children."

Uruguay would join The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Iceland, Argentina and Denmark as the 12th in the world to have state-wide marriage equality.

The surge in Mrs. Clinton’s favorability ratings late in the 2008 campaign, although perhaps partly testifying to her steadily improving skills as a campaigner and to her new role as an underdog in the Democratic primary race, may also have reflected the fact that Republicans had less incentive to criticize her. Instead, they were trying to woo her supporters — or bolster her chances to prolong the Democratic nomination process.

...

A secretary of state is not necessarily above partisan criticism, but attacking a secretary of state can potentially backfire on the opposition party. As Mitt Romney discovered during the presidential campaign foreign affairs can present an unlevel playing field to the opposition party. The White House and the Department of State have a number of defenses that they can employ to shield themselves from criticism, from claiming that they are protecting the national interest, to accusing their opponents of being unpatriotic, to arguing that their opponents lack knowledge of the situation on the ground. The secretary of state, like the president, also enjoys the symbolic trappings of incumbency when she conducts diplomatic affairs.

Were Mrs. Clinton to run for president again, she would lose most of these advantages. Republicans would begin to criticize her, delicately at first, and then more expressly as the election drew nearer.